2025 (12) TMI 405

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....1 (hereinafter referred as "the Act") arising out of Order dated 15.10.2019 of the Learned Assessing Officer/Learned Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 3(1), Gurugram (hereinafter referred as "the Ld. AO") under Sections 143(3)/147 Act for assessment year 2012-13. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee company filed return of income on 31.01.2013 showing income of Rs. 64,14,526/-. The case was selected for scrutiny assessment under CASS and finalized under Section 143(3) of the Act on 10.03.2015 at Rs.65,96,090/-. On perusal of record, the "reasons to believe" were recorded and approval of Ld. PCIT for assessment year under Section 147 of the Act was obtained. The reasons for issue notice under Section 148 of the Act wer....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals confirmed the additions without affording proper opportunity. 4. Because the Order is bad in the eyes of law being against the facts & law." 5. Learned Authorized Representative for appellant/assessee submitted that Ld. CIT(A) wrongly confirmed/reopening of assessment under Section 148 of the Act by ignoring the fact that the case was completed under Section 143(3) of the Act and there was no sufficient material information found to show suppression or omission on part of appellant. Ld. CIT(A) wrongly confirmed disallowance of Rs.33,56,683/- claimed as late delivery charges by holding it as penalty, though, it was not a penalty for any legal infringement, but the amount was under a con....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e posed by the department is only on the legal principle that a breach of contract of this nature is not an allowable expense. On consideration of facts and judicial principles, we are of the view that the department's ground deserves to be dismissed" 6. Learned Authorized Representative for the Department submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) rightly upheld the disallowance of payment of penalty levied by National Informatics Centre. 7. From examination of record in light of aforesaid rival contentions, it is crystal clear that the assessee filed original return of income as Rs.64,14,526/- on 31.01.2013. After selection of case for scrutiny under CASS, the case was finalized under Section 143(3) of the Act on 10.03.2015 at Rs.65,96,090/-....